Kiss Net Neutrality Goodbye

[adrina]

smooch

"Under my proposal, the federal government will stop micromanaging the Internet," Pai said in a statement Tuesday. "Instead, the FCC would simply require Internet service providers to be transparent about their practices."

The net neutrality rules, approved in 2015, prevent internet providers like Comcast (CCVCL) and AT&T (T, Tech30) from deliberately speeding up or slowing down traffic from specific websites and apps. They're intended to prevent those internet companies from picking winners and losers among content providers.

The FCC will vote on the repeal at its monthly hearing December 14. The Republican-led agency is expected to approve it on a party-line vote.

Expect to pay more.

 

[DrDelirium]

smooch



Expect to pay more.

But at least you'll be protected from fake news.

 

[adrina]

But at least you'll be protected from fake news.

That's a really dumbass thing to say.

 

[richard_daily]

The hierarchy and big-state loving right wing has been pushing for a two-tiered internet for over a decade. Fuck them for trying to throttle my bandwidth

 

[AngusBridie]

This has been coming for a while, or more specifically, the ISP's wanted it,, Obama stopped it from happening as many can research for themselves.
This is more big business and politics getting their way...For the betterment of nobody but themselves.

Thanks Trump

Here's another article that has more information..

https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now

 

[BotanyBoy]

smooch



Expect to pay more.

Only if service providers have an effective monopoly under the law. If competition (hierarchy) is allowed then prices will fall.

The hierarchy and big-state loving right wing has been pushing for a two-tiered internet for over a decade. Fuck them for trying to throttle my bandwidth

Wrong wing, the right doesn't love the big state, the left does. Certainly not with regard to the distribution/exchange of goods and services. The dictionary (any dictionary) will confirm this by the very definitions of socialism and capitalism.

The right wing isn't trying to throttle your bandwidth, they are trying to return control/ownership back to the private sector, which is ideologically consistent with capitalism, hierarchy and thus right wing.

Something you and the other big government loving leftist are all bent out of shape about, which is ideologically consistent with socialism, egalitarianism and left wing.

Both in a rather typical fashion no less.

 

[AngusBridie]

Only if service providers have an effective monopoly under the law. If competition (hierarchy) is allowed then prices will fall.



Wrong wing, the right doesn't love the big state, the left does.

Right wing isn't trying to throttle your bandwidth, they are trying to de-socialize the internet service industry....return control/ownership back to the private sector.

I think you're wrong on both accounts, prices will rise if they deem the content that YOU REALLY wanna see be let forth because they can control content that you view, they will indeed charge more. ( ie porn and gaming or even Netflix is bad so pay more )
They aren't out to save you money


and to the next point

They most certainly will throttle bandwith or completely block some content if they so choose. that was the point of what Net Neutrality stopped them before from doing so. they will now.

 

[BotanyBoy]

They aren't out to save you money

Then they will loose a lot of business to those who will.

Walmart...Costco....Coors Light.....McDonalds....all save people money by working on the quantity>quality model and it get them fucking PAID.

Internet market is no different, unless the government is protecting it from competition.

and to the next point

They most certainly will throttle bandwith or completely block some content if they so choose. that was the point of what Net Neutrality stopped them before from doing so. they will now.

The backing of my argument and the downfall in yours lies in the answer to the question who is "they"?

If "they" is the government you would be right.

But it's not, "they" the ones who are might throttle/block etc. internet services are the private owners of the ISP's, not the government. Private/corporate decisions over how they will provide and exchange their services for money. It's quintessential, dictionary perfect Capitalism, right wing.

Net Neutrality is unabashed direct government control over the ISP market, to artificially enforce fairness over hierarchy.... highly socialisti, textbook left wing policy.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Market power and monopoly persevere in Trump's America.

Elections have consequences.

 

[AngusBridie]

Then they will loose a lot of business to those who will.

Walmart...Costco....Coors Light.....McDonalds.

Internet is no different.



The backing of my argument and the downfall in yours lies in the answer to the question who is "they"?

If "they" is the government you would be right.

But it's not, "they" the ones who are might throttle/block etc. internet services are the private owners of the ISP's, not the government. Private/corporate decisions over how they will provide and exchange their services for money. It's quintessential, dictionary perfect Capitalism, right wing.

Net Neutrality is unabashed direct government control over the ISP market, to artificially enforce fairness over hierarchy.... highly socialisti, textbook left wing policy.

They will lose business to whom? many area's dont have more than one service provider or types of services that you want, ( ie Fiber, Cable or DSL)

Sure they may fix that but lets assume they all decide to throttle Netflix for example. Another scenario could be that they decide to crush these markets if they so choose, ATT could decide to launch its own version of Netflix, throttle access to NetFlix streaming site to the point you dont want it unless they route it through a faster access point, ie, if you pay more... then you can still go to netflix, however they can throws theirs on a fast network, thus you can stay on ATT's regular network and pay their fee for their streaming video. which they would conveniently make it slightly cheaper for their own services than going with regular ATT internet services and Netflix of its own. In the end crushing netflix.. its a hypothetical scenario but one that is the entire point of what is and what will happen for services you want. It just might not be Netflix, but I have to imagine streaming video and gaming will be at the top of the "to fuck with" list.

They can divide bandwith speed to wherever they want.

It gives them monopoly power. I'm not sure when big business like this ever had the consumers best interest in mind.

 

[BotanyBoy]

They will lose business to whom? many area's dont have more than one service provider or types of services that you want, ( ie Fiber, Cable or DSL)

That is a whole other problem that only exists because government.

There is no reason that I know of as to why we shouldn't allow competition in that market.

but I have to imagine streaming video and gaming will be at the top of the "to fuck with" list.

Only because the government is blocking competitors from offering better services and prices than the government protected monopoly is price gouging for.

It gives them monopoly power.

No it doesn't....government gives them that by limiting the market.

Getting rid of net neutrality just allows those who have their socialist protections in place to abuse that power.

Two very different things.

I'm not sure when big business like this ever had the consumers best interest in mind.

And that is why government meddling in markets, picking winners, losers and setting up artificial monopolies for the homies is such a bad thing. It almost always results, sooner or later, in abuse of the system because greed is eternal.

 

[Not Normal]

Wrong wing, the right doesn't love the big state, the left does. .

You say that as you defend the Big Government applying is massive power...

 

[BotanyBoy]

You say that as you defend the Big Government applying is massive power...

What big government application of massive power?

 

[AngusBridie]

That is a whole other problem that only exists because government.

There is no reason that I know of as to why we shouldn't allow competition in that market.
Local Govt not FCC, that wont change



Only because the government is blocking competitors from offering better services and prices than the government protected monopoly is price gouging for.

See above



No it doesn't....government gives them that by limiting the market.

Getting rid of net neutrality just allows those who have their socialist protections in place to abuse that power.

Two very different things.

See above again, it wont change that



And that is why government meddling in markets, picking winners, losers and setting up artificial monopolies for the homies is such a bad thing. It almost always results, sooner or later, in abuse of the system because greed is eternal.

Big Govt had too because local govt has been the problem with infrastructure all along, unless you change that, you needed big govt to help the consumer

 

[AngusBridie]

King Joffery is ATT and provides internet to the people of Westeros, the Iron Bank of Braavo told Joffery he must distribute internet under Net Neutral rules.
One day The Iron banks rules are disbanned and Joffery is allowed to determine what the people can see, what they pay , and for what amount now.
Joffery was always about the people and this will work out,

It will even allow competition to come in if the local govts allow this to happen.

Then Ramseys Time Warner will compete with ATT joffery.

It should end well for the people of Westeros

 

[BotanyBoy]

Local Govt not FCC, that wont change

See above again, it wont change that

Then let the socialist suffer the wrath of their socialism.....fuck em LOL

Big Govt had too because local govt has been the problem with infrastructure all along, unless you change that, you needed big govt to help the consumer

No they didn't have to.

They could let the local govt fill it's pants with derp just as they do with many other policies, but someone managed to sell some votes with the promise of not having to suffer the consequences of their own stupidity. They can only do it for so long though....that house of cards on a LARGE scale now is getting shaky as fuck.

 

[Owwee]

smooch



Expect to pay more.

Prices always go up, we have energy saving tvs,fridges ,acs yet the electric bill always goes up !

There is still the No monopolies laws in place and who wants the government controlling their internet like some 1984 style movie.

 

[AngusBridie]

Then let the socialist suffer the wrath of their socialism.....fuck em LOL



No they didn't have to.

They could let the local govt fill it's pants with derp just as they do with many other policies, but someone managed to sell some votes with the promise of not having to suffer the consequences of their own stupidity. They can only do it for so long though....that house of cards on a LARGE scale now is getting shaky as fuck.

If they crush whats going on with local govt and moreso public Utilities, competition may indeed be created. Then its no longer a monolopy they just handed them.
I think this should have been done before they killed this current FCC policy though, and had the infrastructure laid, because in its current form, people are going to get fkd..
You're not entirely wrong about the competition thing, its just that its not coming anytime soon.

 

[BotanyBoy]

If they crush whats going on with local govt and moreso public Utilities, competition may indeed be created. Then its no longer a monolopy they just handed them.

Yep, that's going to require locals to get involved, educate themselves and pay attention like it matters to them.

Fucking with peoples internet might be what it takes to cause that...if so this might be a blessing in disguise.

I think this should have been done before they killed this current FCC policy though, and had the infrastructure laid, because in its current form, people are going to get fkd..

On that I couldn't agree with you more. It should have been done better and more gracefully...absolutely no doubt. Our government is HORRIBLE.

You're not entirely wrong about the competition thing, its just that its not coming anytime soon.

Depends on where you live....it's no doubt going to be shitty for a lot of folks for a while.

It will even allow competition to come in if the local govts allow this to happen.

That will require the local people to be smart enough see through the bullshit lies and promises from the monopoly fans on the left and vote yes for the economic blood bath that will ensue.

Either way it's going to be a rough ride.

 

[Not Normal]

What big government application of massive power?

They are using their power to say they don't care about the individual. We the big government only care about big money making business. They are using their power to let bullies and thieves run amok.

 

[BotanyBoy]

They are using their power to say they don't care about the individual.

Repealing their use of power (net neutrality) isn't the same as application of power. No matter how much you hate freedom.

Net neutrality was the application of power by the big government bullies.

We the big government only care about big money making business.

More like the big government back off the micromanagement of business.

They are using their power to let bullies and thieves run amok.

Again, they are not using their power at all....net neutrality was the use of big government power. Repealing it is the opposite.

 

[BizzyBody]

Market power and monopoly persevere in Trump's America.

Elections have consequences.

Its not to late to vote CuntClinton

polls close 2020

 

[Unabatable]

As millions flocked to the web for the first time in the 1990s, President Clinton and a Republican Congress decided “to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet.” In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the government called for an internet “unfettered by Federal or State regulation.” The result of that fateful decision was the greatest free-market success story in history.

Encouraged by light-touch regulation, private companies invested over $1.5 trillion in nearly two decades to build out American communications networks. Without having to ask anyone’s permission, innovators everywhere used the internet’s open platform to start companies that have transformed how billions of people live and work.

But that changed in 2014. Just days after a poor midterm election result, President Obama publicly pressured the Federal Communications Commission to reject the longstanding consensus on a market-based approach to the internet. He instead urged the agency to impose upon internet service providers a creaky regulatory framework called “Title II,” which was designed in the 1930s to tame the Ma Bell telephone monopoly. A few months later, the FCC followed President Obama’s instructions on a party-line vote. I voted “no,” but the agency’s majority chose micromanagement over markets.

This burdensome regulation has failed consumers and businesses alike. In the two years after the FCC’s decision, broadband network investment dropped more than 5.6%—the first time a decline has happened outside of a recession. If the current rules are left in place, millions of Americans who are on the wrong side of the digital divide would have to wait years to get more broadband...

This is why I’m proposing today that my colleagues at the Federal Communications Commission repeal President Obama’s heavy-handed internet regulations.

How the FCC Can Save the Open Internet
We should undo the Obama administration’s rules that regulate the web like a 1930s utility.

By Ajit Pai Nov. 21, 2017 11:18 a.m. ET

Mr. Pai is the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-fcc-can-save-the-open-internet-1511281099

 

[adrina]

Hmmm I wonder if the "all men are created equal" part of the constitution is a socialist disease which must be stamped out...

 

[BizzyBody]

Hmmm I wonder if the "all men are created equal" part of the constitution is a socialist disease which must be stamped out...

stamp out the rights of CUNTS to VOTE

and

COLOREDS to vote